Everybody has to decide on theirs but many people avoid used BMW's that haven't had more frequent changes; on M cars the initial service is 1200 miles (for their bikes its 600 miles ) so if you think 15K is fine for your motor then go ahead. I change at 5000 using synthetic, that kind of maintainence will enhance resale for the purists (anal?) like myself.

3000 mile oil changes went out with ducktail haircuts and penny loafers. Where have you been for the last half century?

Read the owner's manual and follow the oil change interval prescribed by the CBS (condition based service) computer shown in the dash. Earlier oil changes are wasteful and unecessary.

I've been told by a very experienced euro-based lubricants engineer (Doug Hillary) that BMW does very extensive field testing on each of its models to establish effective and safe maintenance and lubrication schedules. Doug currently works for Mobil, but has worked also for Castrol and in collaboration with BMW specifically on the development of the TWS oil for M cars. According to Doug, BMW uses two independent field testing outfits and he knows personally some of the engineers there. These guys know what the hell they're doing - - more so than anyone on this or any of the other BMW forums (and that includes me, for sure) when it comes to lubrication.

Shortening the factory specified oil change intervals achieves nothing with regard to the longevity/durability of the engine, other than conveying that elusive "peace of mind", and this includes the practice of dumping the factory fill at 1500 mi to wash out all those nasty wear metals (even if BMW says it’s not necessary on your car - - after all what does BMW know – they only make the engines). The practice of gearheads dumping the factory fill at 1500 mi on a new car is a holdover from the days of push rods, carburetors, and bias ply tires.

There is even some recent data/testing (done by Ford and Conoco Philips) that indicates too frequent oil changes may actually be counterproductive. They did tests (published in an SAE paper) that showed that what they called aged oil, or oil thats been in use for awhile, sets up and actually does a better job of lubricating, particularly in antiwear, (up to its condemnation point) than green, fresh oil. So more frequent oil changes may actually increase wear. Heresy! There was a similar study done (I wished now I had bookmarked it) specifically with regard to the antiwear add zddp, that showed fresh oil would dissolve and remove the tribological antiwear layer laid down by the old oil before it would form its own layer. Hard to believe. With respect to the direct injected turbo motors (like the N54/N55) Hillary has even said that he has seen what he calls very reliable data that indicates shortening the oil change interval "negatively affects" the formation of deposits - - the fresh oil just feeds more deposits before it stabilizes.

There was a recent rant (maybe on this forum - - can’t remember) about the lack of a dipstick on some of the latest BMW engines. Actually, you should be happy. That is an indication that the motor is equipped with a neat device designed by Bosch called an oil condition monitor. It constantly measures oil level and the dielectric properties of the oil. As the oil (very, very slowly) ages, picks up wear metals, acids, fuel dilution, and oxidizes, the conductivity or dielectric properties of the oil changes. That’s where all that field testing comes in. BMW can correlate the electrical values measured at any one time to the general condition of the oil and adjust the oil change interval if the oil is in danger of becoming unserviceable. Bosch’s latest oil condition monitor even has a little transducer that bounces sound waves off the oil to measure changes in viscosity. What more do you want?

In spite of all this, we doubt BMW. We love the engineering that goes into the car but somewhere in our reptilian brain some atavism, some primordial fear, tells us the engineers can’t be trusted, that if we want the car to last we must halve the oil change interval to 7500 mi or 5000 mi or whatever.

I’d like to challenge anyone to post a link to a contemporary, scientific study by a reputable source that shows shortening the mfrs recommended oil change interval will increase the longevity and durability of the engine. And I don’t mean Mike Miller’s Old School Maintenance Schedule. I mean a study reported by the Society of Automotive Engineers, or the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, or the Society of Tribologists and Lubricants Engineers - - or similar.

And if you want to impress future buyers when you sell the car, show them UOA (used oil analysis) reports from a reputable ISO certified lab like Polaris (not Blackstone - - they don't do a good job on fuel dilution) showing that the oil you changed according to BMW's schedule was rockin good, and with the BMW it so well engineered that you don't have to spend $$$ doing oil changes at 5k, 7k or whatever.

The only reason that I would doubt BMW is capitalism and basic business. Realistically, BMW does NOT want their cars to last forever because then you wouldn't buy another one. Sure, cars will become obsolete in a sense, but auto manufacturers design components to last with an estimated "life" of the car. If they estimate the engine life to be 100,000 miles, then they may base certain things (such as oli changes) on that figure. This is the only thing that gives me pause about changing oil at 15k miles or whatever the car says. I typically cut the number a mfg recommends in half but not sure if I will continue that practice.

The only reason that I would doubt BMW is capitalism and basic business. Realistically, BMW does NOT want their cars to last forever because then you wouldn't buy another one.

I don't buy this at all. BMW has a thriving/vested interest in selling used BMWs. If all these engines were just falling apart after 100k miles, the forums would be jammed with people screaming about it. I can't recall one, single forum post about someone with a worn out BMW engine due to following mfr. change intervals.

Boschís latest oil condition monitor even has a little transducer that bounces sound waves off the oil to measure changes in viscosity. What more do you want?

Auto vacuuming of the interior?

Very cool technology. I was unaware of this last point.

Quote:

In spite of all this, we doubt BMW. We love the engineering that goes into the car but somewhere in our reptilian brain some atavism, some primordial fear, tells us the engineers canít be trusted, that if we want the car to last we must halve the oil change interval to 7500 mi or 5000 mi or whatever.

Wonderfully and amusingly stated.

I admit to a need to change the first oil fill long before the car phones home. Those shiny little metal particles bug me.

I don't buy this at all. BMW has a thriving/vested interest in selling used BMWs. If all these engines were just falling apart after 100k miles, the forums would be jammed with people screaming about it. I can't recall one, single forum post about someone with a worn out BMW engine due to following mfr. change intervals.

I just used 100k miles as an example. Whatever the mileage, I see older BMWs that are down on power or blowing blue smoke. It is difficult to say what caused it. Again, i am not stating it as fact but as conjecture that gives me pause.

In spite of all this, we doubt BMW. We love the engineering that goes into the car but somewhere in our reptilian brain some atavism, some primordial fear, tells us the engineers canít be trusted, that if we want the car to last we must halve the oil change interval to 7500 mi or 5000 mi or whatever.

Iíd like to challenge anyone to post a link to a contemporary, scientific study by a reputable source that shows shortening the mfrs recommended oil change interval will increase the longevity and durability of the engine. And I donít mean Mike Millerís Old School Maintenance Schedule. I mean a study reported by the Society of Automotive Engineers, or the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, or the Society of Tribologists and Lubricants Engineers - - or similar.

Ummm...ok. First, I don't trust BMW because they are a capitalistic company based on increasing profits. Longer periods between oil changes costs them less (with their free maintenance) and allows their product to possibly wear out sooner meaning they get to sell another one.

The other thing that gives me pause in that there is in fact conflicting information. Here is a link to the Toyota website:

m6pwr; since you're so generous with your information why do M cars (including the N54 1M's) require fluid change at 1200 and BMW bikes at 600 miles? This seems contrary to your position.

Maybe not. The N54/N55 etc is not an S54, S65, etc. Is It? Do you think the BMW engineers missed that? I asked Hillary about this sometime ago and his response was that on some models the mfr wants the factory fills to be changed early - - the factory fill is designed so to speak to be dumped early (the factory fill on the M cars may be quite different from the service fill). Why on the M cars, I don't know. They are as close to a perfectly blueprinted engine as you're going to get and from real world UOA's I've seen on the 1200 mi oil change, they shed almost zero wear metals at all (as they do for most of their useful life from what I've seen, regardless of whether the ocis' are 5k, 7.5k, 10k, whatever the computer dictates, and the UOA's at 100k look like the ones done at 1200 mi). So from a purely wear metals standpoint I can't imagine why BMW wants the oil to be dumped so early. On the other hand, I don't think I've ever seen a UOA on an M engine where the owner disregarded the owner's manual and ran the FF out to 10k or whatever. What then? Disaster?

It's a mistake to assume that the factory fill on any particular BMW model is the same as the service fill. I know that the factory fill on BMW's family of diesels is not. The same for VW and Audi diesels. They all have a FF of FUCHS lubricant (the so-called factory fill specialist in Europe) that may or may not be significantly different from the Castrol service fill. I know from monitoring the VW TDI board that one person who visited the VW diesel engine factory in Germany was told emphatically NOT to change the FF early. Hmmm. Wonder why?

Don't know if this answers your question. Me - - in God and BMW I trust. If I have an M car and they say dump the FF at 1200 mi that's what I'd do. If I have a f30 N55 and they say take it to the CBS mileage. That's what I do.

3000 mile oil changes went out with ducktail haircuts and penny loafers. Where have you been for the last half century?

Read the owner's manual and follow the oil change interval prescribed by the CBS (condition based service) computer shown in the dash. Earlier oil changes are wasteful and unecessary.

I've been told by a very experienced euro-based lubricants engineer (Doug Hillary) that BMW does very extensive field testing on each of its models to establish effective and safe maintenance and lubrication schedules. Doug currently works for Mobil, but has worked also for Castrol and in collaboration with BMW specifically on the development of the TWS oil for M cars. According to Doug, BMW uses two independent field testing outfits and he knows personally some of the engineers there. These guys know what the hell they're doing - - more so than anyone on this or any of the other BMW forums (and that includes me, for sure) when it comes to lubrication.

Shortening the factory specified oil change intervals achieves nothing with regard to the longevity/durability of the engine, other than conveying that elusive "peace of mind", and this includes the practice of dumping the factory fill at 1500 mi to wash out all those nasty wear metals (even if BMW says itís not necessary on your car - - after all what does BMW know Ė they only make the engines). The practice of gearheads dumping the factory fill at 1500 mi on a new car is a holdover from the days of push rods, carburetors, and bias ply tires.

There is even some recent data/testing (done by Ford and Conoco Philips) that indicates too frequent oil changes may actually be counterproductive. They did tests (published in an SAE paper) that showed that what they called aged oil, or oil thats been in use for awhile, sets up and actually does a better job of lubricating, particularly in antiwear, (up to its condemnation point) than green, fresh oil. So more frequent oil changes may actually increase wear. Heresy! There was a similar study done (I wished now I had bookmarked it) specifically with regard to the antiwear add zddp, that showed fresh oil would dissolve and remove the tribological antiwear layer laid down by the old oil before it would form its own layer. Hard to believe. With respect to the direct injected turbo motors (like the N54/N55) Hillary has even said that he has seen what he calls very reliable data that indicates shortening the oil change interval "negatively affects" the formation of deposits - - the fresh oil just feeds more deposits before it stabilizes.

There was a recent rant (maybe on this forum - - canít remember) about the lack of a dipstick on some of the latest BMW engines. Actually, you should be happy. That is an indication that the motor is equipped with a neat device designed by Bosch called an oil condition monitor. It constantly measures oil level and the dielectric properties of the oil. As the oil (very, very slowly) ages, picks up wear metals, acids, fuel dilution, and oxidizes, the conductivity or dielectric properties of the oil changes. Thatís where all that field testing comes in. BMW can correlate the electrical values measured at any one time to the general condition of the oil and adjust the oil change interval if the oil is in danger of becoming unserviceable. Boschís latest oil condition monitor even has a little transducer that bounces sound waves off the oil to measure changes in viscosity. What more do you want?

In spite of all this, we doubt BMW. We love the engineering that goes into the car but somewhere in our reptilian brain some atavism, some primordial fear, tells us the engineers canít be trusted, that if we want the car to last we must halve the oil change interval to 7500 mi or 5000 mi or whatever.

Iíd like to challenge anyone to post a link to a contemporary, scientific study by a reputable source that shows shortening the mfrs recommended oil change interval will increase the longevity and durability of the engine. And I donít mean Mike Millerís Old School Maintenance Schedule. I mean a study reported by the Society of Automotive Engineers, or the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, or the Society of Tribologists and Lubricants Engineers - - or similar.

And if you want to impress future buyers when you sell the car, show them UOA (used oil analysis) reports from a reputable ISO certified lab like Polaris (not Blackstone - - they don't do a good job on fuel dilution) showing that the oil you changed according to BMW's schedule was rockin good, and with the BMW it so well engineered that you don't have to spend $$$ doing oil changes at 5k, 7k or whatever.

Ummm...ok. First, I don't trust BMW because they are a capitalistic company based on increasing profits. Longer periods between oil changes costs them less (with their free maintenance) and allows their product to possibly wear out sooner meaning they get to sell another one.

The other thing that gives me pause in that there is in fact conflicting information. Here is a link to the Toyota website:

They claim that 10k miles is the right number. Obviously they have also done their own studies yet they come up with a different number.

Mercedes and Audi also recommend 10k miles. Based on that information, i'm just not sure about the 15k interval.

Why would you use an oci formulated for a Toyota or an Audi for a BMW? Different oils, different engines, sump capacity, etc. Toyota says use 5w20 oil. Are you using that as the "right oil" for your BMW? Audi and Toyota are Simon Pure while BMW are capitalist swines? Why not use the mfr oci recommended by Cummins (hey, hey, usa, usa) for their heavy duty diesels: 35,000 mi?